The predictive value of mouse liver tumour induction in carcinogenicity testing—a literature survey
Abstract
A survey of the available data in the literature was carried out in an attempt to verify the possible correlation between the capacity of a number of chemicals to induce parenchymal liver tumours in the mouse and their capacity to induce tumours in the liver and/or other organs in the rat and hamster. Data on 58 chemicals were collected. A positive correlation appears to exist between the capacity of a chemical to induce liver tumours in the mouse and its capacity to induce tumours at any site in the rat or the hamster. The strongest correlation is found when the chemical, given to adult mice, induces tumours of the liver and other sites in both sexes. The induction of liver tumours in the mouse by a chemical does not signify that the liver would be the target organ in the rat or the hamster. Among the 58 chemicals considered, seven are recognized or suspected human carcinogens. All were hepatocarcinogenic in the mouse and six were carcinogenic in the liver and/or other organs in the rat. Four were tested in the hamster and found to be carcinogenic.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
For many toxicological endpoints, even closely related species such as the mouse and rat do not predict effects in each other.
“For many toxicological endpoints, even closely related species such as the mouse and rat do not predict effects in each other (Gold et al., 1989; Tomatis et al., 1973).”
From The use of whole food animal studies in the safety assessment of genetically modified crops: Limitations and recommendations (2013) · cites this paper as Tomatis et al., 1973
Cites
Herbst, A. L., Ulfelder, H., & Poskanzer, D. C. (1971) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197104222841604 · Cited by 2,545 · see citing works
Survey of Compounds Which Have Been Tested for Carcinogenic Activity
(1942) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1942.02830330148018 · Cited by 347 · see citing works
Vaginal Cancer after Maternal Treatment with Synthetic Estrogens
Greenwald, P., Barlow, J. J., Nasca, P. C., & Burnett, W. S. (1971) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197108122850707 · Cited by 329 · see citing works
Clear-Cell Adenocarcinoma of the Genital Tract in Young Females
Herbst, A. L., Kurman, R. J., Scully, R. E., & Poskanzer, D. C. (1972) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197212212872501 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
Ser., W. H. O. T. R. (1968) · Cited by 186 · see citing works
IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to man
(1980) · Environmental Pollution Series A Ecological and Biological · doi:10.1016/0143-1471(80)90139-7 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
The effect of long‐term exposure to DDT on CF‐1 mice
Tomatis, L., Turusov, V. S., Day, N., et al. (1972) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.2910100308 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Self-citationReport of the Secretary's Commission on Pesticides and Their Relationship to Environmental Health
(1971) · Food and Cosmetics Toxicology · doi:10.1016/0015-6264(71)90047-2 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
The value of the mouse in carcinogenicity testing.
GRASSO, P., & Crampton, R. F. (1972) · PubMed · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Roe, F. J. C., & Grant, G. A. (1970) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.2910060117 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Carcinogenic Activity of Some Benz(a)Anthracene Derivatives in Newborn Mice
Roe, F. J. C., Dipple, A., & Mitchley, B. C. V. (1972) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.1972.63 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Metformin: An Old But Still the Best Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes
Rojas, L. B. A., & Gomes, M. B. (2013) · Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome · doi:10.1186/1758-5996-5-6 · Cited by 567 · see citing works
Interspecies extrapolation in carcinogenesis: prediction between rats and mice.
Gold, L. S., Bernstein, L., Magaw, R., & Slone, T. H. (1989) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.8981211 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Bartholomaeus, A., Parrott, W., Bondy, G., Walker, K., & on behalf of the ILSI International Food Biotechnology Committee Task Force on the Use of Mammalian Toxicology Studies in the Safety Assessment of GM Foods (2013) · Critical Reviews in Toxicology · doi:10.3109/10408444.2013.842955 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
“For many toxicological endpoints, even closely related species such as the mouse and rat do not predict effects in each other (Gold et al., 1989; Tomatis et al., 1973).”
Background
- Authors
- Tomatis, L., Partensky, C., & Montesano, R.
- Affiliations
- Centre international de recherche sur le cancer (FR)
- Venue
- International Journal of Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1973-07-15
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-20
- ISSN
- 0020-7136 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0215
- OpenAlex
- W1963706630
- Cited by
- 88
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2015: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Cancer and biochemical research
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Keywords
- hepatocarcinogenesis, carcinogenicity testing, predictive value, interspecies correlation, rats, hamster, target organs, human carcinogens, chemical carcinogens
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Carcinogens, Female, Cricetinae, Liver Neoplasms, Male, Neoplasms, Experimental, Species Specificity, Mice, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
